Donald Trump has appointed Robert Kennedy Jr, a prominent vaccine conspiracy theorist, to chair a commission on "vaccination safety and scientific integrity".
Mr Kennedy accepted the request at Trump Tower where they talked about vaccines and immunisations, according to the President-elect’s press secretary Sean Spicer.
Both men share a belief that there is a link between vaccines and autism. The theory has been repeatedly debunked and the Center for Disease Control said on its website that there not "any link" to the neurodevelopmental disorder.
cheeto benito is just trying to hook up with jenny mccarthyyeah, this will end well
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ittee-sceptic-autism-conspiracy-a7520351.html
Orac's take on this was a good read.yeah, this will end well
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...ittee-sceptic-autism-conspiracy-a7520351.html
I haven't read Orac in ages I'll look that upOrac's take on this was a good read.
Cool video. With that said, Mark Hamil once compared BO to Obi-Wan Kenobi. Lost respect for Hamil for that misstep comment. BO is closer to Dooku than he is Obi-Wan.wasn't sure where to put this so why not here?
Is this what y'all mean by orac?I haven't read Orac in ages I'll look that up
yupIs this what y'all mean by orac?
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2017/01/11/donald-trump-meets-with-antivaccine-ideologue-robert-f-kennedy-jr/
i liked this part
One of the things that really irritated me about seeing the flood of stories over the afternoon as I sat in my office taking advantage of a canceled case to work on a paper was how often RFK, Jr. was described as a “vaccine skeptic.” (I’m talking to you, Business Insider, but not just to you.) He is not. He is an antivaccine crank, a vaccine science denialist of the highest—or should I say lowest?—order. He is no different at his core than anthropogenic global climate change denialists, creationists (a.k.a., evolution denialists), or any number of ideology-driven science-denying cranks,
i think he is a moron.I think people just can't bring themselves to bash a Kennedy, especially RFK's namesake who has established himself with involvement in a number of liberal causes. It is easy to call Jenny McCarthy an idiot, but not him even if he is dead wrong on the issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
a lot of liberals agree with Jenny McCarthy, the left is not free of science denial just has different stupid beliefs. Anti-vax is fairy bi-partisan and perhaps even a bit more left leaning as the granola/anti corporate types will believe any evil they can attribute to "big pharma"I think people just can't bring themselves to bash a Kennedy, especially RFK's namesake who has established himself with involvement in a number of liberal causes. It is easy to call Jenny McCarthy an idiot, but not him even if he is dead wrong on the issue.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I am glad you bring up this point. Many like to think the anti-science movement is purely the domain of the religious right. But it is a dangerous trend, and I think it directly correlates to everyone believing that they are entitled to their own personal truth. Scary as heck to me and thanks for pointing out that its everywhere.a lot of liberals agree with Jenny McCarthy, the left is not free of science denial just has different stupid beliefs. Anti-vax is fairy bi-partisan and perhaps even a bit more left leaning as the granola/anti corporate types will believe any evil they can attribute to "big pharma"
I think most of the left had no idea RFKjr was such as nutt bag, it will be interesting to see how they respond
Oh yeah, the left isn't blameless in the war on science even if they tend to be more science literate they dodge the topic when it hits home. Look at the all the new agey people that think crystals can heal and water has memory (when it comes to the good things in it, but not the bad for some reason) and they tend to be very lefty. Not a lot of right wingers shopping whole foods and that store is absolutely filled with nonsenseI am glad you bring up this point. Many like to think the anti-science movement is purely the domain of the religious right. But it is a dangerous trend, and I think it directly correlates to everyone believing that they are entitled to their own personal truth. Scary as heck to me and thanks for pointing out that its everywhere.
Senator Jeff Sessions, Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general, has come under fire for accepting an award from right-wing extremist David Horowitz.
What Sessions said when he accepted it may prove to be even more explosive.
“Ultimately, freedom of speech is about ascertaining the truth,” Sessions, an Alabama Republican, told Horowitz’s audience on Nov. 14, 2014. “And if you don’t believe there’s a truth, you don’t believe in truth, if you’re an utter secularist, then how do we operate this government? How can we form a democracy of the kind I think you and I believe in… I do believe that we are a nation that, without God, there is no truth, and it’s all about power, ideology, advancement, agenda, not doing the public service.”
unfortunately, that attitude seems quite pervasive.our favorite local son doesn't believe I am unfit for Government
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...aid-secularists-are-unfit-for-government.html
I edited out my double negativeunfortunately, that attitude seems quite pervasive.
Well now wait. He said "utter" secularist. Are you an utter secularist or perhaps somewhat secularist? Perhaps we can involve you if you are uncertain in any way, with your filthy secularism.our favorite local son doesn't believe I am fit for Government
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...aid-secularists-are-unfit-for-government.html
i thought he said udder secularist and was talking about heathens from the barn. he is a bama law grad.Well now wait. He said "utter" secularist. Are you an utter secularist or perhaps somewhat secularist? Perhaps we can involve you if you are uncertain in any way, with your filthy secularism.
There's a group trying to encourage scientists to run for political office, which I think is an interesting initiative. Obviously there are countless scientists who adhere to a variety of religions, but that subpopulation is certainly more secular than the general population. And religious or otherwise, I'd hold "truth" as begotten through reason, evidence, and the scientific method up against whatever seemingly faith-based method Sessions seems to advocate instead.unfortunately, that attitude seems quite pervasive.