I don't doubt they track everything.
the mic thing no
cia front or whatever the fuck he says, ummmm NO
Teh Goooglez Are Coming - Alex Jones Says So - OH NOEZ
- Thread starter AdExhibitJason
- Start date
the mic thing no
cia front or whatever the fuck he says, ummmm NO
definitely agree with the last part, even if they could, it would be mostly useless unless they're looking for someone or something specific. Textual and traffic data is far more useful as it can be more quickly analyzed by computers.
Bullshit, i always seem to get internet marketing ad's, wholesale, business ad's. And that is all i talk about when im infront of my camera. I remember once i was talking about the black eyed peas, and an adsense ad with jamster came up when i was on youtube watching peter chao with none other then the black eyed peas.
eh? I grew up in the military, had an IEP (was hearing impaired, apparently one's gota go thru a lot of hoopla when you're disabled), regular IQ tests growing up (2 fucking hours long... ugh), averages around 129 to 138.
But you know what though? IQ results are a BS indicator of actual intelligence, you could have an IQ of 160 and still somehow manage to be a dumbshit in the real world. It's only a measure of what you should theoretically be capable of if you actually applied yourself, not a measure of how intelligent you actually are.
lol amazing how someone in the Us can still be freaking out about being spyied on.
Doesnt the government already know how much money you have, who you call and where you spend your money? 1984 is now our reality and we're accepting it bc its all about fighting da terruristz DUH.
Doesnt the government already know how much money you have, who you call and where you spend your money? 1984 is now our reality and we're accepting it bc its all about fighting da terruristz DUH.
I think the brits have more reason to freak out, not only have shitload of cameras in London, more relaxed privacy rights, and the inability to own a firearm, and for sake of a compromise they can't just easily escape to Canada.
U.S. court rules again against vaccine-autism claims | Reuters
SeaTownJosh's retardation is funny but harmless assuming he doesn't vote, but not vaccinating kids has real world consequences.
Herd immunity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You should consider taking medical guidance from doctors instead of Jenny McCarthy.
Andrew Wakefield was the fucking tool that started the latest round of vaccination haters with the MMR vaccination. You should read up on the current situation regarding him:
"If you think people don't vaccinate because of autism alone you are wrong. Autism isn't even one of the reasons we don't vaccinate, that's how low on the list it is."
What about the case of Hanna Poling..the girl who the vaccine injury compensation courts DID conclude that vaccines definitely played a role in her developing autism?
Case Study: Autism and Vaccines - TIME
She had an underlying medical condition, that combined with vaccines caused problems. Since the standard vaccine schedule starts at birth there is no way that we can know if a child has underlying medical conditions before vaccinating them.
Vaccines are only tested on children who are healthy, but they are given to all children no matter their health. Low birth weight, premature, chronic illness, it doesn't matter what might be wrong with you, the AAP (American Academy of Pediatrics) and the CDC find you suitable for the one size fits all vaccine schedule, found "safe" by testing it on children with absolutely no underlying medical
conditions.
The vaccine manufactures directly list those whom should NOT receive the vaccine. Including children under certain ages, children with mild illnesses like a common cold, people with seizure disorders, asthma, etc. So why do doctors and the CDC go directly against what the pharmaceutical companies deem safe?
Also, vaccines are not testing for carcinogenic effects or possible effects on fertility. Not something I am willing to take a gamble with.
Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis, Impairment of Fertility: PEDIARIX has not been evaluated for carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or for impairment of fertility.
http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_pediarix.pdf
Aside from that, an artificial immunity caused by a vaccination will never compare to the lasting natural immunity you would get from the disease.
Why do you think that the CDC saw signs of elderly people being immune to H1N1?
Now, herd immunity is a THEORY. Do they really want me to bust that one down or are they starting to feel the heat already?
I had her stop there
Was gonna give you -rep for using horrible English while berating someone for same, plus just going off on people out of nowhere, being generally abusive for no GOOD reason. And for being a moron.
But the below is so entertainingly batshit insane that I wanted to give +rep for the sheer hilarity and entertainment value.
And they cancel each other out.
But then there's the principle that stupidity really should be painful. So -rep.
BTW nobody has to put your shit in Word to look for mistakes, they're pretty glaring and stupid in your posts as-are.
But the below is so entertainingly batshit insane that I wanted to give +rep for the sheer hilarity and entertainment value.
And they cancel each other out.
But then there's the principle that stupidity really should be painful. So -rep.
BTW nobody has to put your shit in Word to look for mistakes, they're pretty glaring and stupid in your posts as-are.
Wait I held out on the -rep when I saw this, I just realized that you CAN'T be serious. Good show.
Meanwhile millions of peoples lives have been saved from smallpox, polio etc. Your wife's arguments are just full of logical fallacies (how do you get natural immunity form a fatal disease?), she should look at the science behind it, not what she sees on Oprah. In science the word theory has a far different meaning than to the lay person.
Is she starting to feel the heat yet?
Name one disease we vaccinate against in the current schedule that is 100% deadly.
The word theory holds the same meaning no matter who you are, so please explain the difference.
Oprah really? Ummm, last I checked she is more an advocate for vaccines. Not that we would listen to anything from her and the psycho babbling drs she has on.
All the information we have reviewed comes from Medical Journals, CDC Pink Book, The CDC MMWR, Vaccine Package Inserts, etc.....
So show me your science then. I will show you mine.
It's late here and I'm about to crash, so juet a quick reply:
Why does it have to be 100% deadly?
Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method
Also, pretty interesting article in New Scientist on how incorrect assumptions can start:
Short Sharp Science: Fighting the anti-vaccine brigade - with science
Why does it have to be 100% deadly?
Scientific Laws, Hypotheses, and Theories - The Scientific Method
Also, pretty interesting article in New Scientist on how incorrect assumptions can start:
Short Sharp Science: Fighting the anti-vaccine brigade - with science