Mark Hansen wrote:JREF is the James Randi Educational Foundation. It looks like Tobias posts a lot of stuff about Autism on there. It wouldn't surprise me that someone from this forum also goes on there, and gave Tobias a heads up about the discussion here.

So he's their resident pro-pharm kook. Glad to see he's being treated as an objective source here- speaks to the gullibility of some EA members. Do you find his claims to have 'not known who Eli Lilly was' before yesterday credible?

newberry wrote:

Those are all studies that know where their next meal is coming from- the industry they study. You think university studies are objective?

Please cite the objective, unbiased studies that show direct evidence that mercury in vaccines causes autism.

It's hard to prove a negative. But if mercury causes autism, I would think it would be fairly easy to demonstrate scientifically.

Everyone has their own biases. That's human nature. Even people who have no financial motive. Once someone has a particular idea imbedded in their mind, it's very hard to ignore that idea, when it is what you feel on a gut level.

Passion is a great thing, but in research, if you want true results, it seems to me that you need to be dispassionate, so as not to skew the results you get.

I reject your definition of 'unbiased'.

I don't recall defining that term here; if I'm wrong, please cite.

I suspect there is a causal relationship, based on what I know about government's cozy relationship with the pharmaceutical companies.

You suspect. That's fine, I respect that. However, it appears that you don't have evidence.

Glad to see he's being treated as an objective source here- speaks to the gullibility of some EA members.

Who called him an objective source? We all have biases and prejudices, including you and I. Tobias made the point that you should argue with his data, not him, which is a good point. Let's talk about the facts and evidence.

It wouldn't surprise me that someone from this forum also goes on there, and gave Tobias a heads up about the discussion here.

Me. I posted at JREF that there was a mercury/vaccine/autism discussion here.

clocker bob wrote:

Mark Hansen wrote:JREF is the James Randi Educational Foundation. It looks like Tobias posts a lot of stuff about Autism on there. It wouldn't surprise me that someone from this forum also goes on there, and gave Tobias a heads up about the discussion here.

So he's their resident pro-pharm kook. Glad to see he's being treated as an objective source here- speaks to the gullibility of some EA members. Do you find his claims to have 'not known who Eli Lilly was' before yesterday credible?

I don't know, and I don't really care. Quite honestly, with his statements about Autism in his family, it wouldn't surprise me if he had a form of it himself, since he seems to have a single-minded focus about the subject. That singlemindedness is one of the markers of the syndrome. If you have Autism, and you are that focused on one particular subject, or a small range of subjects, then it is credible, because it might be outside the subject the person is focused on.

newberry wrote:

It wouldn't surprise me that someone from this forum also goes on there, and gave Tobias a heads up about the discussion here.

Me. I posted at JREF that there was a mercury/vaccine/autism discussion here.

Thanks for inviting a commie here.

"TobiasTheCommie"
wtf

Mark Hansen wrote:

clocker bob wrote: Do you find his claims to have 'not known who Eli Lilly was' before yesterday credible?

I don't know, and I don't really care.

Well, I care, because it's preposterous to think that someone could have that much data on autism and vaccines at his fingertips and not know that Eli Lilly is a giant pharmaceutical company. It's like someone who researchs gas stations saying, "Exxon who?". I don't like being lied to.

Bob, let us know when you have the evidence of a direct link between mercury in vaccines and autism. From an unbiased source.

newberry wrote:Bob, let us know when you have the evidence of a direct link between mercury in vaccines and autism. From an unbiased source.

Your definition of unbiased is biased. I have already said that I don't remotely care about the weight of ( purchased ) studies against my position. It means no more to me than the Warren Commission. Continue your indoctrination.

Bob: please show me where I defined "unbiased."

Here's a quote from you:

Those are all studies that know where their next meal is coming from- the industry they study. You think university studies are objective?

OK, show me any direct (beyond anecdotal evidence or mere correlation) evidence that links mercury in vaccines to autism. And why did the rate of autism increase after mercury was removed from the vaccines?