Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If you have a problem with the article then state where the information is erroneous, to say the information is erroneous because of who published it is a logical fallacy and it is you who are most certainly wrong.
Logical fallacies are a deliberate attempt at putting forth misinformation.
A link from a REPUTABLE source would have been nice, as opposed to conspiracy whackjob site. It's like posting something from The Onion, and then wondering why I don't take it seriously.
A link from a REPUTABLE source would have been nice, as opposed to conspiracy whackjob site. It's like posting something from The Onion, and then wondering why I don't take it seriously.
Well, if everyone who disagrees with him in the world doesn't go through every YouTube video, article written by a delusional nut, and random thought and refutes them he must be true right?
Like Icke's shape-shifting lizard people projecting reality from the moon are true because people realized he has diarrhea of the mouth that cannot be stopped.
A link from a REPUTABLE source would have been nice, as opposed to conspiracy whackjob site. It's like posting something from The Onion, and then wondering why I don't take it seriously.
When you say, "reputable" do you really mean, "mainstream"? Because all news sources are biased.
And if the CDC is covering up information regarding studies one would think that those who deem the CDC as their #1 source of trustworthy health information would care to know the details of what happened. It's crazy to me that many don't seem to care at all.
Yeah, that source with science behind it is disreputable...so just believe whatever dumb **** mental patients post.
The CDC? OK, well the story is about a Senior, award winning researcher from the CDC who decided to blow the whistle on corruption in the organization he works for, the CDC. So if you are saying that the only source of information about this story itself should be coming from the CDC then which version should we listen to?
And if the CDC is covering up information regarding studies one would think that those who deem the CDC as their #1 source of trustworthy health information would care to know the details of what happened. It's crazy to me that many don't seem to care at all.
The CDC? OK, well the story is about a Senior, award winning researcher from the CDC who decided to blow the whistle on corruption in the organization he works for, the CDC. So if you are saying that the only source of information about this story itself should be coming from the CDC then which version should we listen to?
Sedition.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
