Florida plans to become first state to eliminate all childhood vaccine mandates

[Scott]

You and I can define any word any way we like.

Nope.

We may need to agree to disagree here, atleast for now.

Neither of us own the language.

Irrelevant.

Neither of us can define any words. We can only agree to a non-binding definition within the context of our discussion.

That second sentence of yours is the key. We can agree to define a word any way we like- all we need is to agree upon said definition. Dictionaries, on the other hand, are constrained to -common- definitions for words.

 

[IBDaMann]

What you did above reminds me of something I've heard about ChatGPT for a while- it tends to agree with whatever the user suggests they believe.

So ChatGPT is a contradictory source, in any event?

 

[IBDaMann]

The opening post in a thread Walt started back in 2020 comes to mind:

https://justplainpolitics.com/threads/want-to-know-what-a-nice-person-thatowlwoman-is.133700/

Guess who's banned from that thread

 

[IBDaMann]

You say a lot of other things that will get us nowhere fast.

You are blustering.

What you should have done instead of coming up with theories as to why I disagree with you, was to have simply asked -why- I don't believe abortions are a subset of contract killings.

I gave you that opportunity. You never explained how abortion is somehow not a contract killing.

The key is in the word killings.

... of living humans

It's all about the relative importance of the human fetus vs. the human mother.

In contract killings, the customer putting out the hit on a mark always assigns greater importance to his own convenience than he does to the life of the mark, and the contracted killer agrees.

No one is suggesting that anyone should have the right to kill a living human -

That's what an abortion is when there's a heartbeat, which there is around the three-week point. Abortion is the killing of a living human in the womb by a paid professional killer.

Yet most of us are not averse to eating chicken.

Most of us are averse to eating human.

 

[Scott]

Dictionaries, on the other hand, must focus on the most common definitions for words.

Dictionaries don't focus on definitions.

ChatGPT has said both that dictionaries do definitions and that they don't- clearly it all depends on the questions it's asked. The one thing we can agree on is that dictionaries don't -define- words. They simply say how words -are- defined. In other words, common definitions of words that people have come up with.

 

[Scott]

While it can be nice to be able to define words any way we like if we're just communicating with ourselves, it becomes a real problem if we're communicating with others who don't share our personal definitions for said words.

You just described the root of all communication breakdowns.

I don't know about that, but it looks like we agree that personal definitions for words can cause a lot of problems.

This is why dictionaries can be quite helpful in avoiding this type of situation.

Yes, via usage explanations, not definitions.

I don't see the difference.

 

[Scott]

Alright, how would -you- define science?

Science is the collection of falsifiable models that predict nature.

Are you familiar with the idea of CAUSE -> EFFECT ? Science predicts the unambiguous effects of unambiguous causes in nature. The scientific method tests, among other things, the actual effects of unambiguous, repeatable causes and verifies that they are the predicted effects of those causes.

That sounds reasonable.

 

[Scott]

Thanks for responding. The topic of your first interaction with IBD had come up. I imagined that, like IBD, you go by something of a "I don't strike first, but I do retaliate" motto. IBD disagreed. Here's what he said:
**
You would be greatly mistaken. Her first words to me were insults, along with others with whom she intended to gang-fling poo.
**

I was skeptical, but I -have- seen some posters go straight for the jugular with some newbies that looked innocent to me, so I couldn't rule it out. It's just that you don't seem the type.

Update: I decided to see if I could see first hand what your first interaction with IBDaMann was. Looks like it was this post:

Post in thread 'The Coronahoax Needs To End'

Jul 29, 2020

COVID-19 has already gone away ... presuming it actually was a real thing.

What bothers me is the government and it's rush to grab power at the expense of We the People. What worries me is that We that People can be arrested and have our businesses shuttered by the government using as justification the very hoax perpetrated by the government.

What worries me is a government that preys on the trusting&gullible among us to drive them into a panic over those who do not fall for the scam, e.g. those who don't wear facemasks because they don't perform for...

• ThatOwlWoman

I mean, I think it was a tad insulting, but rather tame by the standards of this place.

I am not seeing it. "The irony" and a laugh emoji is "insulting"? What was that in reply to? Again, I don't see his posts as he is on ignore.

This was what it was in response to:
**
COVID-19 has already gone away ... presuming it actually was a real thing.

What bothers me is the government and it's rush to grab power at the expense of We the People. What worries me is that We that People can be arrested and have our businesses shuttered by the government using as justification the very hoax perpetrated by the government.

What worries me is a government that preys on the trusting&gullible among us to drive them into a panic over those who do not fall for the scam, e.g. those who don't wear facemasks because they don't perform for anyone's amusement.
**

 

[Scott]

Thanks for responding. The topic of your first interaction with IBD had come up. I imagined that, like IBD, you go by something of a "I don't strike first, but I do retaliate" motto. IBD disagreed. Here's what he said:
**
You would be greatly mistaken. Her first words to me were insults, along with others with whom she intended to gang-fling poo.
**

I was skeptical, but I -have- seen some posters go straight for the jugular with some newbies that looked innocent to me, so I couldn't rule it out. It's just that you don't seem the type.

Update: I decided to see if I could see first hand what your first interaction with IBDaMann was. Looks like it was this post:

Post in thread 'The Coronahoax Needs To End'

Jul 29, 2020

COVID-19 has already gone away ... presuming it actually was a real thing.

What bothers me is the government and it's rush to grab power at the expense of We the People. What worries me is that We that People can be arrested and have our businesses shuttered by the government using as justification the very hoax perpetrated by the government.

What worries me is a government that preys on the trusting&gullible among us to drive them into a panic over those who do not fall for the scam, e.g. those who don't wear facemasks because they don't perform for...

• ThatOwlWoman

I mean, I think it was a tad insulting, but rather tame by the standards of this place.

IBDaMann = Into the Night = gfm7175 = Sybil, a schizophrenic. I suspect he's also Uncensored2008

Your credibility in regards to deciphering who is and isn't a sock is rather tarnished, considering you accused -me- of having socks here. I've never had a sock here, or in any other online forum. IBDaMann and Into the Night seem to get along fairly well, but getting along with someone is definitely not the same thing as being the same person. They also do have some minor differences of opinion from time to time. I haven't interacted as much with gfm, but he seems like an alright guy from my rather vague recollections of him. From what little I remember of Uncensored2008, he seems to be a tad too abrasive for me to communicate with much.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Your credibility in regards to deciphering who is and isn't a sock is rather tarnished, considering you accused -me- of having socks here. I've never had a sock here, or in any other online forum. IBDaMann and Into the Night seem to get along fairly well, but getting along with someone is definitely not the same thing as being the same person. They also do have some minor differences of opinion from time to time. I haven't interacted as much with gfm, but he seems like an alright guy from my rather vague recollections of him. From what little I remember of Uncensored2008, he seems to be a tad too abrasive for me to communicate with much.

Then why waste your time with me, Scott?

 

[Scott]

I will say that I'm not impressed with Wikipedia on some subjects, such as vaccines. That being said, I think that for subjects wherein a person knows little, it can generally be a good starting point- as Lefty points out, every Wikipedia article cites sources, which certainly isn't the case when it comes to many articles online, including from the mainstream media.

What about the CDC?

Improving under RFK Jr.'s leadership, but clearly still a ways to go.

The Mayo clinic? The National Library of Medicine?

I took a look at the articles you referenced from these organizations, they didn't impress me either.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

Improving under RFK Jr.'s leadership, but clearly still a ways to go.

I took a look at the articles you referenced from these organizations, they didn't impress me either.

Interesting.

No surprise.

 

[Scott]

Researchers and journals can claim that they are following the scientific method in their research. This doesn't mean that they actually are, ofcourse, but I think it's good that science and the scientific method is generally respected enough that whether research or journals are using the scientific method becomes important.

Those researchers and journals are peer-reviewed.

There's a lot of problems with peer review in journals. An article on the subject:

Scientists’ suit against top academic publishers lays bare deep frustration over unpaid peer review

Researchers have sued six big academic publishers, arguing their practices are illegal and anticompetitive.

www.statnews.com

I personally favour pre prints, where anyone can see and review what researchers are doing. Even there, however, some good papers have been retracted due to what I imagine was Big Pharma pressure.

If you're reading a blog by Joe Blow, then it's best to check their facts.

We should -always- check the facts. Getting published in a peer reviewed journal doesn't mean the facts are right, especially when dealing with subjects where Big Pharma and its lackeys in government have a lot of power. RFK Jr. wrote a good book on Fauci's role in this mess:

Amazon.com: The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (Children’s Health Defense) eBook : Kennedy Jr., Robert F.: Kindle Store

The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (Children’s Health Defense) - Kindle edition by Kennedy Jr., Robert F.. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and...

www.amazon.com

 

[Dutch Uncle]

There's a lot of problems with peer review in journals. An article on the subject:

Scientists’ suit against top academic publishers lays bare deep frustration over unpaid peer review

Researchers have sued six big academic publishers, arguing their practices are illegal and anticompetitive.

www.statnews.com

I personally favour pre prints, where anyone can see and review what researchers are doing. Even there, however, some good papers have been retracted due to what I imagine was Big Pharma pressure.



We should -always- check the facts. Getting published in a peer reviewed journal doesn't mean the facts are right, especially when dealing with subjects where Big Pharma and its lackeys in government have a lot of power. RFK Jr. wrote a good book on Fauci's role in this mess:

Amazon.com: The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (Children’s Health Defense) eBook : Kennedy Jr., Robert F.: Kindle Store

The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health (Children’s Health Defense) - Kindle edition by Kennedy Jr., Robert F.. Download it once and read it on your Kindle device, PC, phones or tablets. Use features like bookmarks, note taking and...

www.amazon.com

Awesome. Thanks.

 

[Scott]

The pay was terrible, but the job came with some great books on teaching English grammar and that's what basically started my English teaching career.

Teachable moment. Break out one of those books and turn to the "prepositional phrases" section, then look at the following clause:
**... being a native English speaker was enough to get a pass to do the job in at least the one school I started at**

Prepositional phrases always begin with the preposition; they never end in one.

" ... being a native English speaker was enough to get a pass to do the job in at least the one school at which I started "

I no longer have the English grammar books I had back then. Even if I did, I suspect they might not have finer points like the one you mentioned, as they were for grade school kids. I actually went to a web site I tend to frequent these days for my english students, englishclub.com and... I finally found its section on prepositional phrases -.- It was hidden in a page on phrases in general:

https://www.englishclub.com/grammar/sentence/phrases.php

Anywa, I figure if I make the mistake as a native English speaker that's read a lot of books and written a fair amount, and that sites meant to help English teachers don't cover, it's probably not that big a deal. I can't see myself saying "at which I started", but I certainly could have said "being a native English speaker was enough to get a pass to do hired in the first school I taught in".

 

[Scott]

I use the term biological to differentiate biological viruses from computer viruses. I -do- believe that computer viruses are real.

Okay. It CAN be argued that a cell operates like a little computer though.
It just uses a base4 encoding scheme instead of a base2 encoding scheme.

Sure, and I certainly believe that cells exist, as well as bacteria. I also suspect that some microbes that are classified as biological viruses are actually bacteria. The issue here is not that people don't see microbes that are labelled as biological viruses in electron microscopes. The issue is whether they actually fit the description of actual biological viruses.

 

[Scott]

I think we might agree that vagueness and ambiguity are pretty similar.

"Similar" is insufficient. "Vagueness" implies a lack of clarity, which is not exactly the problem. "Ambiguity", on the other hand, carries a different meaning, one that poses a problem. The Latin root "ambi" means "either" or "each" (although all standard erroneous sources will erroneously tell you that it means "both", but they are all wrong) and something that is ambiguous allows you to have one not-vague meaning while I have a completely different not-vague meaning. Not only will we talk past each other, but all falsifiability is destroyed, and hence science is destroyed, along with math or other closed functional systems in which axioms must be unambiguous.

Can we agree that vague instructions are frequently ambiguous as well? Another thing I thought I'd mention, virology uses ambiguous language with its own twisted definition of isolation. From an essay on the subject of biological viruses:
**
Virology invented the virus model but has consistently failed to fulfil its own requirements. It is claimed that viruses cause disease after transmitting between hosts such as humans and yet the scientific evidence for these claims is missing. One of virology’s greatest failures has been the inability to obtain any viral particles directly from the tissues of organisms said to have “viral” diseases. In order to obfuscate this state of affairs, virologists have resorted to creating their own pseudoscientific methods to replace the longstanding scientific method, as well as changing the dictionary meaning of words in order to support their anti-scientific practices. For instance, an “isolated” isolate does not require the physical existence of the particles in order to be afforded “isolation” status.
**

Source:

https://drsambailey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/A-FAREWELL-TO-VIROLOGY-Expert-Edition-V1.2.pdf

 

[Scott]

I will say that I'm not impressed with Wikipedia on some subjects, such as vaccines.

Of course you are dissatisfied. It is a very political topic, thus Wikipedia has the carefully crafted, Marxist narrative locked down so that no Wikipedia contributor can alter a single word.

I don't know about it being "marxist", and I'm sure that -some- contributors can still alter things, but I definitely think that the wrong people are in charge there.

That being said, I think that for subjects wherein a person knows little, it can generally be a good starting point

WRONG! For a person who knows little, Wikipedia is a primary Marxist indoctrination point. Let me know when that is ever good.

Again, I don't see this "marxist" thing, but people need starting points. Wikipedia offers them.

as Lefty points out,

Ignored.

Sigh. I mentioned his name as a way of pointing out that I'm not alone in my own view on the subject. Wikipedia certainly has its flaws, but at least it always lists sources for its material. Many mainstream news publications don't.

 

[Scott]

Insults are the surest way of silencing any productive discussion. If that's your aim, congratulations. If it's not, you might consider explaining why you don't find my sources to be trustable.

Every [profanity starts up]

I give up.

 

[Scott]

Do you approve of abortion for convenience?

I believe women should be allowed to choose whether or not they want to remove a fetus from their body.