Note: All statistics are to be doubted. They are the biggest support for more government. However, while claims about how schoolchildren are getting fatter, or how many women have been raped, fall apart when definitions and measurements are looked at, recorded numbers of illnesses like Mumps and Hepatitis A are hard to fake. Correlation is not causation. But, when incidences of vaccination and illnesses vaccinated against are so constantly and inversely conjoined, and when there are theoretical frameworks from which falsifiable, but unfalsified, hypotheses can be derived, statistics do say something real about the world. SIG
Discover more from The Libertarian Alliance
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I agree about “statistics” in general, as collected by state bureaucrats of all sorts. The problem with being a statist is that one then believes as an item of the Religious Vulgate that,
“_if data exist, about anything, then they //MUST BE// collected_ and by force if need be_” .
This is in all probability a modern – that is tosay: post-Fabian – historical inflation of the concept of the Saxon Tribal and Burghal Hideages, in 1085 expanded to give rise to the Domesday Book, which was at the time a reasonable earlyish state response to the problem of what the practicable limits of taxation in England might be.
As to vaccination, one can only agree with the thrust of this article.
Turning back to statistics as taught in UK schools, even a cursory look at the exam questions, say for A-level syllabuses, will horrify any minimal-statist/classical-liberal. I’ll let you all look the papers up for yourselves!
All this modernity is no good for us, it is against nature. All illnesses can be treated with a change to a wholefood diet, homeopathy and smoking marijuana. All other so-called “cures” are just a way to sell the by-products of the petrochemical industry to a gullible public which poisons them and gives them cancer. Nobody would ever get ill if they ate only the produce of their own smallholding, free of corporate pesticides.
I urge everyone to vote Green, and save mankind from this Modernity Madness.
Well, that is a valid alternative view of things. We may not agree with it, but are prepared to hear all sides.
But Ian, who will build the roads?
Roads are the tyranny of the petrochemicarchy, scarring Mother Nature’s beautiful green face. Roads only exist because of the State. Tear them up!
Good point. Except I do want to keep the one that gets me from my house (nearest neighbor 50 miles away) to the international supermarket, drugstore, and LIBRARY in 5 minutes. Hm. Maybe I’ll have to put in a helipad to get FedEx and UPS deliveries. I do need the Internet and books, LOTS of books, roads or no roads.
Carbon Legacies: A Threat to the Environment.
More seriously [ ????? ], here is the abstract of an article from the Journal of Medical Ethics by Cristina Richie, Theology Department, Boston College, which argues that since every human “emits carbon” into the environment,
“ART” stands for “Assisted Reproductive Technology.” It includes such things as fertilization in vitro and artificial insemination, as well as methods of having babies where the child might be born with AIDS, and more.
(WikiFootia has a good overview at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_reproductive_technology .)
From Ms. Richie’s article:
Views in which “the environment” is seen as of higher moral value than human beings as such are perverse in the strongest and most serious sense of the word. (Print Compact OED 1971, = 1933 OED plus addenda gives various definitions, several of which boil down to “turning away from right to wrong.”) To me, the word has a connotation of DELIGHT in turning from right to wrong, and a deliberate inversion of right and wrong, so that the evil is seen as good and the good, as evil.
All I can say is, I place a very high value on my own personal Carbon Legacy, who in early middle age continues to provide joy, light, and warmth to my life. Besides, this person grows houseplants and, in summer, tomatoes and peppers, so I figure that offsets the inevitable “emission of carbon.” (Whatever does Ms. Richie think that means? There’s a huge variety of carbon-containing molecules that are “emitted” by a huge variety of sources, most of them “natural.”) Personally I think that once we’ve gotten fluorine out of the way by banning it (per a suggestion by some doofus over here), we should simply ban carbon. That would solve everything. At least from the human point of view, which would no longer exist.
Wesley J. Smith of LifeNews.com has a piece on this entitled “Population Controllers Call Babies ‘Carbon Legacies,’ a Threat to the Environment,” at
http://www.lifenews.com/2014/08/08/population-controllers-call-babies-carbon-legacies-a-threat-to-the-environment/ .
Per Mr. Smith:
“And Jesus said, ‘Suffer the little carbon legacies to come onto me’….”
Actually that graphic doesn’t tell us anything much about efficacy of vaccines. If you think it does you need to go back to school… a real school that will teach you real science and critical thinking.