276ca141   
   XPost: talk.politics.crypto, alt.politics.howard-dean, alt.flame.rednecks   
   From: kingkongg@iglou.com   
      
   "Peter Baeder"  wrote in message   
   news:7083460c-bd2d-4df7-82dc-d90183254f97@j9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com   
   > On Nov 13, 11:25 am, Michael Dobony  wrote:   
   >> On 13 Nov 2010 16:22:20 +0100, Colin wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Don't forget that "scientists" are the ones who stopped the popular   
   >>> medical procedeure of a good bleeding followed by consuming   
   >>> Tincture of Mercury.   
   >>   
   >>> Everybody did it in the old days, and it was the best way to stop   
   >>> being sick.   
   >>   
   >>> And we all know that if the people say it works, it works. It's   
   >>> common sense.   
   >>   
   >>> But noooo! Now when you go to the doctor and ask for a good bleeding   
   >>> followed by a perscription of Mercury Tincture, he laughs at you   
   >>> like you are some kind of uninformed fool. Little does he know that   
   >>> almost everyone back a few hundred years ago used it to avoid   
   >>> everything from Gout to Bad Bodily Humours. How can millions of   
   >>> people be wrong about something? It just doesn't make sense. It's   
   >>> all part of the big conspiracy by "scientists" to take control of   
   >>> our lives and deny us our rights.   
   >>   
   >> "Scientists" also put the doctor, who reduced child birth deaths by   
   >> requiring doctors to clean up after surgery before delivering a   
   >> baby, in an insane asylum!   
   >>   
   >> Science does NOT blacklist people who have conflicting evidence, as   
   >> does the IPCC. Science does NOT hide data, as the IPCC admitted to   
   >> doing. Science does NOT draw cause and affect conclusions from   
   >> correlation studies.   
   >   
   > The new science is all about blacklisting.    They blacklisted the   
   > same scientists who assured us that smoking was bad for you, so they   
   > found safe harbor and a new job fighting the orthodoxy by joining the   
   > anti-AGW team.  When the government mandated seat belts in cars, it   
   > was going to cripple the auto makers by forcing them to spend $5   
   > more.   But nobody listened to the skeptics.   
   >   
   > And now, a 2010 Corvette costs way more than it did in 1967 when they   
   > didn't have seat belts.   
   >   
   > If that isn't proof, I don't know what is.   
      
   Of course. What else could it possibly be?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)